About your Search

20121204
20121204
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
been fairly quiet throughout the first term of the obama administration. now the president has been reelected, george w. bush sort of comes out a little bit to make this big address, why? what is the timing about, do you think? >> i think the timing was shrewd. he really made a point of staying quiet during the first couple of years of president obama's administration, saying that he wanted the about the to be able to do his job, he didn't think he needed a former president to go out there and do somed tore ra some editorializing. he gave some peaches, enjoyed his life. he was not the subject of any praeurbgsz in fact not the subject at all at the republican convention in tampa in august. as mitt romney was trying to win the presidentee again, george w. bush was really a recluse. i think now that the election is over the republicans lost. he wants to have a role in one of his causes. immigration is a passion he shares with his brother jeb, former governor of florida who is thinking of his own political future and possibly a white house run and wants to help in the reset of the repub
at the amount of time, particularly in the obama administration, even more so than the george w. bush of administration, you look at senior officials who go to asia, throughout the region, and also the discussion and attempt to courtney with china. there seems to be a lot of that to try to coordinate. but again coming back to jim steinberg was the fourth member of this panel would happily and armitage and joe knight looking at the die you island dispute, and said they were shocked and surprised why the level of miscommunication, ms. assessment and dangerous of that between china and japan. so it raises them up question of whether or not, i agree. i know china wants respect to whether or not what you are seeing is a strategic game, or tactical game by china to use its potential ms. assessment to kind of look like the unstable part in some of his to basically help push out some interest. and that we've been a little bit. >> steve, i think the essential question is not of domination or respect, it's about whether it will be static of whether it will be dynamic. and there is no way that n
coalition. he said he had been motivated to act because he felt vilified by the obama administration after his businesses were investigated. he is being unfairly prosecuted for bribing and money laundering. >> yes. hum. in most places that is considered a crime. >> stephanie: when i see what is happening to me and this company, that kind of behavior has to stop. >> stop pointing out the things i did. >> stop. >> stop it. >> stop it. [ laughter ] >> ann romney: stop it. >> stephanie: i love this part. adelson is scheduled to travel to washington, d.c. where he will meet with at least one republican leader to push for changes to the anti-bribery law. why does bribery have to be illegal? [ laughter ] >> wow. >> stephanie: oh that is just -- >> i'll give you a hundred if you make this law go away. [ laughter ] >> stephanie: who could be so uptight about bribery. that's delightful. >> did i say a hundred? thousand. okay. a million. 10 million. >> stephanie: all right. 17 million -- 17 million -- see i'm talking and sheldon and 17 million just rolled off of my tongue. >> yo
so far. this is the obama's administration offer. every day here in "the new york times"of the two proposals a the fiscal cliff continues to dominate washington here today and this week. irandy in alabama, republicans. caller: i think both of the approaches here are ridiculous. we keep talking about reforming the taxes when it is so complicated that an average person cannot even do it. it's really time to stop reforming the idea of taxes with all these tax ideas. it all it's going to do is drive up inflation. every time we raise taxes, inflation goes up. we really need to go to something like a consumption tax. there's a lot of space out your that do not even haven't come taxes, and their roads are really nice and they do not have been come taxes. they live off other taxes. i think they need to try to fix this whole thing was out just keeping throwing money at it. increasing rates and all of this stuff, it's madness. host: we showed you what senate majority leader harry reid had to say it in reaction to last night proposal from speaker john boehner. house democrats are having a cau
the number of permits during the obama administration's first term and there will be a price to pay in our energy costs over the next four years. we hear people saying over and over and over again, americans must pay their fair share. the rich must pay their fair share. everyone must pay their fair share and on that i am in 100% agreement with our president, with leader reid at the other end of this building, with my friends across the aisle, democrats here who want everybody to pay their fair share, i'm in 1 pun% agreement. we -- 100% agreement. we absolutely should do that. make everybody pay their fair share. lots of folks use the metaphor, let's make sure everybody has some skin in the game. well, if you really want to have everyone pay their fair share, there is an easy answer and fortunately it would drive this economy to brand new heights, it would drive this country and our economy to a new economic renaissance. it would be incredible and all of our friends around the country who are suffering, who don't have even $3 a gallon to pay for gasoline, it would help them when they can't
hand, particularly since the republicans outraised obama 5-1 on wall street which is a real reverse since 2008. the markets are so upset with the minimal oversight that the administration has put on them that they've swung to the g.o.p. camp this time, and they're not going to buckle on that. >> eliot: brian, let me come back to a political-type question. defense cuts, another area where the democrats are saying we have the opportunity sequestration imposes more significant cuts in the military. many think that's a good thing to do. barney frank every chance you give him he'll talk loudly why it's the correct thing to do. is there a chance that the republicans will give him that one? >> it depends on what happens between now and the first of the year. if you go over the cliff and all the tax cuts expire and sequestration takes affect, that gives the president the ability to reorganize the defense budget in a way that tracks what he wants to do with the military spending, which is to slow the growth or even to freeze the growth in real terms. if they cut a deal beforehand and then pu
years of the bush administration when it shot up dramatically as well. so it's not simply a barack obama phenomenon. but i don't. what we see both from my own work inside the senate and observation from what we see with books like mike grunwald's is that it was a very deliberate strategy hatched at least at inaugural if not before to try to raise the bar and to block things from happening, and to get unanimous minority support. and to do it not just on build 40 want to amendments, but on build where he had no interest, just make it all messy and make it difficult. i'm not going to defend barack obama's outreach to the minority party, but i could go back to knot the use of the filibuster but other methods of obstruction with bill clinton who reached out all the time. so i think that's the factor but a minor one. i think harry reid's use of filling the amendment tree, partly this is chicken and egg, but has been done too much and that didn't result in at least some protests and willingness of some senators on his side who might otherwise have joined in some of these filibusters to do so. i
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7